The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutReport 1Jill Din From: Sent: To: Subject: Jill Ding Monday, April 20, 2015 11:18 AM 'William Rehe' FW: Automatic reply: Pinnacle Apts CAE Reconsidertion Terry would be willing to meet with your arborist to inspect the trees. From: Terrence J, Flatley Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 11: 16 AM To: Jill Ding; Vanessa Dolbee Subject: RE: Automatic reply: Pinnacle Apts CAE Reconsidertion Hi Jill, -~ '._.().A\S ~,lQ_ I would be happy to meet with their arborist representative to look at the specific trees and try and understand why trees on a slope would become a risk for people if they were to fall. I am not understanding the "why" the trees I looked at would impact people at all. From: Jill Ding Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 6:49 AM To: Vanessa Dolbee; Terrence J, Flatley Subject: FW: Automatic reply: Pinnacle Apts CAE Reconsidertion See attached. From: William Rehe [mailto:william rehe@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 8: 13 PM To: Jill Ding Subject: Re: Automatic reply: Pinnacle Apts CAE Reconsidertion Sorry. I realized I did not attached the files. Here they are. On Tuesday, April 14, 2015 8:10 PM, Jill Ding <JDing@Rentonwa.gov> wrote: I am currently out of the office until April 20th. I will respond to your inquiry when I return. 1 Jill Din From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Bill, Jill Ding Wednesday, April 08, 2015 6:51 AM 'William Rehe' Vanessa Dolbee; Terrence J. Flatley Pinnacle Apts CAE Reconsidertion Critical Areas Exemption Denial_Hazard Tree.Veg. Mgmt_lS-000079.pdf; Request for Reconsideration.pd/ I've received the additional information you submitted regarding the Critical Areas Exemption Denial for the Hazard Tree removal at the Pinnacle Apartments. Based on my review of the additional information, I understand that you are proposing to removed 7 trees within the steep slope area. I thank you for the additional information provided, however this report does not address the main finding by the City's arborist Terry Flatley, which is that to be considered a dangerous tree, the tree must be a danger to "persons or property". When Terry visited the site, he found that the trees in question had no target (i.e. would not pose a danger to persons or property if they were to fall), therefore the trees would not be classified as Dangerous Trees and would not qualify for removal under the City's Critical Area Exemption procedures. Thank you, Jill Ding Senior Planner CED City of Renton ( 425) 430-6598 jding@rentonwa.gov 1 s _"!;,-- FORM L{4"i'------,----~--~,c,• . , , ' _..-;:;tg:' . ", l_":'' . ' _' . -·' . . .. _''·J.. . . ' .·-. ~ ,_.· ,, -·-' .. DATE: t~ <-e -/~! ,~~OJECT NAME_: '·f:Jr~ /A.; t /k .1t= f=;J4_ ··.·,,.~ ~~ LANDUSENb~~~~)2~/l1s OCXDC?zc; PL~ERNAME:· ~,11 · v~&J' .. · CUSTOMEI,lN~;' -~ ~HONE: Cf:;z5-YS?l39~ NOTE: · ,._£.LLr~ E:, 'vf:o APR 06 Zo1 ILDtNGo ·1v,s This intake form ls not intended for Building Permit Plan Review Comments ION A&M Tre ,efflce NW, Inc. Commercial & Residential Services March 27, 2015 Pinnacle at Lake Washington c/ o Bill Rehe 1400 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton, WA 98056 c_0.45 .... ooov 7'7 -:I(!( ()i'/ Thank you for the opportunity to help you with your tree needs. Attached is the report and the hazard evaluations that you requested. If you have any questions regarding this report I can be reached on my cell phone at 425-770-3040. Sincerely, Michael A Morey Jr. A & M Tree Service NW, Inc. ISA Certified Arborist #PN-6934A ISA TRAQ 1794 425-867-2307 Arborist Report for Pinnacle at Lake Washington Prepared by Mike Morey Jr. PN-6934A TRAQ# 1794 A&M Tre..,nice NW, Inc. Commercial & Residential Services Scope of Work On March 27, 2015 I visited the property at 1400 Lake Washington Blvd N also known as Pinnacle at Lake Washington apartments to do a review of several already identified trees. I have over 18 years in the industry. I am a Certified Arborist as well as a Qualified Tree Risk Assessor which is also known as TRAQ. This qualification from the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) allows me to assess the risk of your tree( s ). My visual assessments include a rubber mallet, a spade, a field microscope, binoculars, Stanley tape measure, and pruning shears and a digital laser rangefinder. Observation: This is an established property located both on a hillside as well as at the base of said hillside. The areas between the two are separated by a critical area containing a steep slope (the hillside) which is where the trees identified in this report are located. The vegetation is mostly blackberry, alder, cottonwood and maple with some fir and cedar here and there. Discussion: There were a total of 10 trees identified; however, I only did tree risks on 9 as I did not see any risk involved in the 10th identified tree. My findings are as follow ... Tag# 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 Species DBH # of trunks Condition Acer Macrophvllum 20" 9 Compromised root svstem/slooe Acer Macroohvllum 20" 7 Compromised root svstem/slope/soil Alnusrubra 26" 1 Compromised root svstem/sloPe Acer Macrophvllum 48" 2 Compromised root svstem/slooe Acer Macrophyllum 40" 2 Compromised root system/slope/multi svmotoms Acer Macroohvllum 40" 1 Compromised root wstem/slooe Pseudotsuga menziesii 11" 1 Slight curve at top Pseudotsu"" menziesii 16" 1 Compromised root wstem/s]ope/soil Pooulus 20· 1 Comoromised root svstem/slone/soil Arborist Report for Pinnacle at Lake Washington Prepared by Mike Morey Jr. PN-6934A TRAQ# 1794 Hazard Rating 10 10 9 8 10 8 6 8 10 A&M TM 0ffl00 NW, Inc. Commercial & Residential Services Conclusion/Recommendations: Several trees do need to be removed and left for habitat This work needs to be completed with a certified arborist on site. I would also suggest that a certified arborist climb and inspect tree #196 and remove only damaged and defective limbs. Tree #197 should have reduction cuts made on the maple branches to allow for better growth. I would also suggest that you have a geotechnical engineer evaluate the slope area further in the near future. Below are pictures to help identify the trees .... • Arborist Report for Pinnacle at Lake Washington Prepared by Mike Morey Jr. PN-6934A TRAQ# 1794 A&M Tnlsemce NW, Inc. Commercial & Residential Services • Arborist Report for Pinnacle at Lake Wa shington Prepared by Mike Morey Jr. PN -6934A TRAQ# 17 94 PLANNING AND LAND USE INTAKE FORM DATE: f-~-/_5 PROJECTNAME: l?,r,11cu-/c af c-.a-Jc;._,_ {-0c--s/,£"r LAND USE NUMBER: ,::_ a A r 5 c,c."X')O 7 '1 PLANNER NAME: 0t I I JJ, .: Ls,/ } CUSTOMER NAME: ----zz;:;;??t,:-c~ "-, 4.c/~.1,-:tJ(.J'HONE: C/ ;_2 _,S -<(,S,7/S''f ~ NOTE: 7 // If ,.,2. .)..{,• (;{[ C 'ccJ-t_.'-<7--- .! '/ This intake form is not intended for Building Permit Plan Review Comments A&M TreG _ervice NV/, Inc Commercial & Residential Services March 27, 2015 Pinnacle at Lake Washington c/o Bill Rehe 1400 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton, WA 98056 Lt,A...4'J5 ~ oa ov 7'7 -:J:tl o,·~ Thank you for the opportunity to help you with your tree needs. Attached is the report and the hazard evaluations that you requested. If you have any questions regarding this report I can be reached on my cell phone at 425-770-3040. Sincerely, Michael A Morey Jr. A & M Tree Service NW, Inc. ISA Certified Arborist #PN-6934A ISA TRAQ 1794 425-867-2307 • Arborist Report for Pinnacle at Lake Washington Prepared by Mike Morey Jr. PN-6934A TRAQ# 1794 A&M T .. Service NW. Inc. Commercial & Residential Services Scope of Work On March 27, 2015 I visited the property at 1400 Lake Washington Blvd N also known as Pinnacle at Lake Washington apartments to do a review of several already identified trees. I have over 18 years in the industry. I am a Certified Arborist as well as a Qualified Tree Risk Assessor which is also known as TRAQ. This qualification from the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) allows me to assess the risk of your tree(s ). My visual assessments include a rubber mallet, a spade, a field microscope, binoculars, Stanley tape measure, and pruning shears and a digital laser rangefinder. Observation: This is an established property located both on a hillside as well as at the base of said hillside. The areas between the two are separated by a critical area containing a steep slope (the hillside) which is where the trees identified in this report are located. The vegetation is mostly blackberry, alder, cottonwood and maple with some fir and cedar here and there. Discussion: There were a total of 10 trees identified; however, I only did tree risks on 9 as I did not see any risk involved in the 10th identified tree. My findings are as follow ... Tag# Soecies DBH # of trunks Condition Hazard Rating 191 Acer Macroohvllum 20" 9 Compromised root =stem/slone 10 192 Acer Macrophvllum 20" 7 Comoromised root svstem /slone /soil 10 193 Alnus rubra 26" 1 Compromised root svstemlslone 9 194 Acer Macronhvllum 48" 2 Comoromised root svstem /slone 8 195 Acer Macrophyllum 40" 2 Compromised root system/slope/multi 10 svmntoms 196 Acer Macroohvllum 40" 1 Comoromised root ~·stem tslone 8 197 Pseudotsmrn menziesii 11" 1 Slight curve at ton 6 198 Pseudotsu= menziesii 16" 1 Comoromised root svstem/slooe/soil 8 199 Ponulus 20" 1 Compromised root svstem/slone/soil 10 • ' Arborist Report for Pinnacle at Lake Washington Prepared by Mike Morey Jr. PN-6934A TRAQ# 1794 A&M Tree .__in'ice NW, Inc. Commercial & Residential Services Conclusion/Recommendations: Several trees do need to be removed and left for habitat. This work needs to be completed with a certified arborist on site. I would also suggest that a certified arborist climb and inspect tree #196 and remove only damaged and defective limbs. Tree #197 should have reduction cuts made on the maple branches to allow for better growth. I would also suggest that you have a geotechnical engineer evaluate the slope area further in the near future. Below are pictures to help identify the trees .... Arborist Report for Pinnacle at Lake Washington Prepared by Mike Morey Jr. PN-6934A TRAQ# 1794 A&M Tree (_en1ce NW, Inc. Commercial & Residential Services Arborist Report for Pinnacle at Lake Washington Prepared by Mike Morey Jr. PN-6934A TRAQ# 1794 DEPARTMENT OF Cu,.JIMUr.llTY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION D APPROVAL ~ DENIAL EVALUATION FORM & DECISION of An "X" is shown in the applicable critical areas exemption box. When an activity is proposed that requires a critical areas exemption, the staff evaluation is written on the lines below. The decision to approve or deny the requested critical areas exemption can be found at the conclusion of this form. PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT MANAGER: APPLICANT: Hazard Tree and Vegetation Management LUAlS-000079, CAE Jill Ding, Senior Planner Thomas Kachman Essex Property Trust 11911 NE 151 Street, #B112 Bellevue, WA 98005 ZONING DESIGNATION: RM-F PROJECT LOCATION: 1400 Lake Washington Blvd N SUMMARY OF REQUEST: On February 12, 2015, the applicant submitted an application for a Critical Areas Exemption for the removal of hazard trees from a protected slope in accordance with RMC 4-3-0SOC.5.iii. RMC 4-3-0SOC.4.d Criteria for Critical Area Exemption Approval. i. The activity is not prohibited by this or any other chapter of the RMC or State or Federal law or regulation; Staff Comment: The definition of Dangerous Trees is outlined under RMC 4-11-200 Tree, Dangerous: Any tree that has been certified, in a written report, as dead, terminally diseased, damaged, or otherwise dangerous to persons or property by a licensed landscape architect, or certified arborist. On February 19, 2015, staff received an email from the City's Arborist stating that the trees in question did not pose a threat to persons or property and therefore did not meet the definition of a dangerous tree. ii. The activity will be conducted using best management practices as specified by industry standards or applicable Federal agencies or scientific principles; City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Hazard Tree and Vegetation Management Critical Areas Exemption Report & Decision LUAlS-000079, CAE Report of February 26, 2015 Page 2 of 3 DECISION Staff Comment: As previously stated above the trees in question do not pose a threat to persons or property ond therefore do not meet the definition of o dangerous tree. iii. Impacts are minimized and, where applicable, disturbed areas are immediately restored, unless the exemption is a wetland below the size thresholds pursuant to subsection CSf(i) of this Section; Stoff Comment: As previously stated above the trees in question do not pose a threat to persons or property ond therefore do not meet the definition of a dangerous tree. iv. Where water body or buffer disturbance has occurred in accordance with an exemption during construction or other activities, revegetation with native vegetation shall be required. Staff Comment: As previously stated above the trees in question do not pose a threat to persons or property and therefore do not meet the definition of a dangerous tree. v. If a hazardous material, activity, and/or facility that is exempt pursuant to this Section has a significant or substantial potential to degrade groundwater quality, then the Department Administrator may require compliance with the aquifer protection requirements ofthis Section otherwise relevant to that hazardous material, activity, and/or facility. Such determinations will be based upon site and/or chemical-specific data. Stoff Comment: As previously stated above the trees in question do not pose o threat to persons or property and therefore do not meet the definition of a dangerous tree. The proposal does not comply with the 5 criteria listed in RMC 4-3-0SOC.4.d for approval of critical areas exemptions. Therefore, the Hazard Tree & Vegetation Management critical areas exemption(s) for the removal of trees on a protected slope, Project Number LUAlS-000079, CAE is(are) denied. 2-26-2015 Date Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Department of C6 , unity ...... d Economic Development Hazard Tree and Vegetation Management Report of February 26, 2015 ..,, ,.ital Ar ..... .., Exemption Report & Decision LUAlS-000079, CAE Page 3 of 3 The decision to deny the critical areas exemption(s) will become final if not appealed in writing together with the required fee to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 on or before 5:00 pm, on March 12, 2015. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's office, Renton City Hall -7'h Floor, (425) 430-6510. If you have any further questions regarding this decision, feel free to contact the project manager, Jill Ding, at 425.430.6598 or jding@rentonwa.gov. _:XHIBIT 1 Jill Ding From: Sent: To: Cc: Terrence J. Flatley Thursday, February 19, 2015 2:33 PM Jill Ding Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Re: Pinnacle Apartments Hi Jill, To be considered hazardous, there needs to be associated targets. I could find no targets for the trees. I could not locate tree #10. All trees should remain. The arborist report is misleading in my opinion. They have removed nearly 2 dozen other trees recently; someone might want to look into that aspect also. Terry Flatley, Urban Forestry & Natural Resources Manager, City of Renton, WA, 425-430-6600 Sent from my iPad On Feb 12, 2015, at 10:59 AM, Jill Ding <.JDing@Rentonwa.gov> wrote: Hi Terry, I received this application for the removal of hazardous trees for the Pinnacle Apartments. Can you verify that these trees are in fact hazardous trees? Thanks, Jill Ding Senior Planner CED City of Renton (425) 430-6598 iding@rentonwa.gov From: William Rehe [mailto:william rehe@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 7:26 AM To: Jill Ding Subject: Re: FW: Pinnacle Apartments Jill, Here is the application material. Please let me know if you need additional information. Thank you, Bill 1 • On Friday, February 6, 2015 6:36 AM, Jill Ding <JDing@Rentonwa.gov> wrote: The master application, critical areas exemption form, and the arborist report will need to be submitted. I can waive the additional items on the checklist. Jill From: William Rehe [mailto:william rehe@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 6:24 AM To: Jill Ding Subject: Re: FW: Pinnacle Apartments Hi Jill I need to know what sections of the application will be required. Thank you Bill Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android From:"Jill Ding" <JDing@Rentonwa.gov> Date:Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 6: 15 AM Subject:FW: Pinnacle Apartments William, I am happy to assist you through the permit process. I have reviewed the tree report and it is my understanding that Laureen has given you the critical areas exemption application. Please let me know how I can be of assistance to ye submitting your application. Thank you, Jill Ding Senior Planner CED City of Renton (425) 430-6598 jding@rentonwa.gov Fl'om: Vanessa Dolbee Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2015 3:08 PM To: 'William Rehe' Cc: Jill Ding Subject: RE: Pinnacle Apartments William, Jill Ding, Senior Planner, has been assigned your project. She is cc' ed on this e-mail. Jill can assist you with puttin~ 2 together your permitting pac.<age aud will process the permit. She will contact you shortly with the necessary informati, to get you started. Have a great day, Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Community & Economic Development Department Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 (425)430-7314 From: William Rehe frnailto:wil!iam rclu:-(g';vah(l(u..:om] Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2015 9: 11 AM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Re: Pinnacle Apartments Ms. Dolbee, I have been working with Terry Flatley on some vegetation issues at the Pinnacle Apartments. There are a number of hazard trees on the site that have been identified by an arborist. We have been trying to remove thi, trees for months. I was told by Terry that I need to work with you to determine what permit information is needed for removing the hazard trees and performing other maintenance on the property. In case Terry did not forward you the hazard tree report, I've attached a copy. Please contact me at your earliest convenience. Apartment residence are getting extremely nervous about these trees. Thank you, Bill Rehe 253-389-0712 On Friday, January 23, 2015 4:07 PM, Terrence J. Flatley <Tflatley@Rcntonwa.gov> wrote: Hi Bill, It may not be as daunting as it seems. I recommend that you contact a planner and go over what it is planned and obtain waivers (different than exemptions) on the things that are necessary to do (e.g. remove hazard trees). The first place to begin is fill out the main application as best you can without getting too technical (i.e. geotech reports would be technic, putting together area maps would not be) and call Vanessa Dolbee, the Current Planning Manager. She will probably se up a time with a planner to go over the application materials you can provide and apply waivers for things that apply. Vanessa's phone number is 425-430-7314 or email is VDolbee@rcntonwa.gov. My guess is that you will get waivers to remove hazard trees at the very least. I did speak with Laureen and she concurs with this approach as well. I apologize for what may seem a run-around but as I explained we are working with new co1 in 2015 and business implementing them has changed. Terry Flatley, Certified Arborist -Municipal Specialist Urban Forestry and Natural Resources Manager Tree Risk Assessment Qualified 6'" Floor 3 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425-430-6600 From: William Rehe rmallto:williarn rchcCi:i'vahoo.comj Sent: Friday, January 23, 2015 2:09 PM To: Terrence J. Flatley Subject: Pinnacle Apartments Hi Terry, The name of the planner I originally spoke to was Laureen Nicolay. See told me to speak to you. I have the critical area exemption and master application. I am very concerned with the amount of reports and plans t. are required by the exemption. The project arborist recommends quick action to protect life and property. It take several weeks to months to provide plans, geotechnical reports, wetland assessments, stream and lake study, flood hazard data, etc. Please let me know what you find out from Laureen. Thank you, Bill <Pinnicle Application Material.pdf> 4 • Bill Rehe Pinnacle on Lake Washington site XHIBIT 2 a I UV I I.:, l_.:) I 'II V V I LLl- lV IV V</. a r b O r i S t S 11 IV. CO ill RECEIVED FEB O 5 201, ,, CITY OF RENTON Pf.ANNING DJVJSION P.O. Box 909 Mercer Island, WA 98040 (206) 779-2579 I have personally inspected several trees at "Pinnacle on Lake Washington" complex as you requested. Keeping in mind your desire to create a long term plan for the trees and land around and on the property I used a International Society of Arboriculture level 1 Limited visual assessment. Jeff from Tolt Tree care had pointed out 6 trees in particular. I added 4 trees after a closer look at the original trees. The trees I will discuss are now tagged and number 1-10 find the attached maps with their locations. Of the trees there are 2 different situations, trees on the severally undermined lip of the bluff which I would call coastal if it was closer to lake Washington which is across Lake Washington Blvd. from the complex. The western edge of the property·still has the look of a coastal wasting Bluff. The species involved are Red Alder, Cottonwood, Big leaf Maple and 2 Douglas firs (#'s 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9 and 10). The second situation, trees hazardous to the building and people (#5, 6 Big Leaf Maples and 7 a Douglas fir) One of the trees that I added to my inspection was particularly interesting (#10). This tree appears to be a remnant of the last large scale slough off of material on this vertical face. The trunk of the tree is growing downhill and would be lying on the ground if there was any under it and is in the 18-22" DBH range. In my opinion this tree was a small sapling at the time of the last slough off stayed rooted in the new precipice then flourished after a period of stress and die back. In observing the tree from the west one can see the original stem now dead and in the 3-4" diameter range about 10' long then the old remaining live trunk. This trunk is in the same size range as the trees in the debris field (Noting the size of the trees in the debris field below a wasting bluff is a method of determining major wasting events, my opinion is 25-30 years ago). There are 2 leaders that look like trees growing out of the original trunk with slightly smaller DBH's then the trees in the debris field 22-25" DBH. Now to the trees on what I will call the lip of the slope. 2 trees numbered 1, 2 are stump sprouted Big Leaf Maples having several trunks and are severally undermined with more than half of their root systems either missing or under cut. Trees with this problem also include number #'s 3, 4 andlO above Red Alders, #8 a Douglas fir, #9 a Cottonwood. Numbers 3, 4 8, 9 are normally shaped trees. Number 4 has a 45% lean and bow sweep All of these trees in my opinion need cut back to let them retain their live root systems and secure the soils buy reducing the weight hanging off the lip of the bluff. This mitigation can add years if not decades to the position of the bluff edge and slows its creep towards the buildings on the property. Counting·on trees to re-sprout is an excepted method of this type of control and the 3 main species involved are some of the best at re-sprouting. Red Alder, Big Leaf maple and Cottonwood. So the trees as hazards; There is a high risk of pulling the top face of the bluff down and a moderate risk to fall far enough to hit the carport of the apartments below, That is if just the top lip and the trees fall. This in no way addresses a larger landslide. Trees numbered 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, and 10 Now to the trees that don't affect the bluff but are hazardous to the buildings proper. There are 2 BLMs with extensive past branch and scaffold branch failures. One has extensive stump decay #5 the other a 25' -30' spiral crack in the trunk #6 showing the intensity of the winds effect on this tree. Both of these trees are on the windward side of the building and within 35' of it. One tree is in the 125' tall (6) range the other in the 80' range (5). I would give these trees a hazard rating of 12 on the older \SA hazard form out of a possible 12. Tree 6 could last until spring but after the leaves reemerge any winds may cause the tree to fail. Tree number 5 with the severe stump rot in my opinion should be mitigated as soon as possible! Fortunately both trees can be counted on to re-sprout keeping their root systems alive. Tree number 7 a Douglas fir on the far north of the property has lost its top and is now deformed with one large apically dominating branch now growing towards the building and within 15'. Structural pruning or possible removal and replacement of this tree would be the methods of mitigating this situation. In closing structural pruning, cutting for re-sprout and replacement trees or shrubs are the methods of mitigation to help you in your plan to manage the wasting bluff, stand stability and reduce hazardous conditions near the buildings. Respectfully Submitted Neal Baker ArboristsNW.com ISA Cert PN1075A ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified PNW ISA CTRA #867 Member AREA & SOCA 206 779 2579 0 .;,.. ' D .;,.. 0 ,:::, DEPARTMENT OF CO,v,Ml.m1ITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION D APPROVAL L8J DENIAL EVALUATION FORM & DECISION of An "X" is shown in the applicable critical areas exemption box. When an activity is proposed that requires a critical areas exemption, the staff evaluation is written on the lines below. The decision to approve or deny the requested critical areas exemption can be found at the conclusion of this form. PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT MANAGER: APPLICANT: Hazard Tree and Vegetation Management LUAlS-000079, CAE Jill Ding, Senior Planner Thomas Kachman Essex Property Trust 11911 NE 1" Street, #B112 Bellevue, WA 98005 ZONING DESIGNATION: RM-F PROJECT LOCATION: 1400 Lake Washington Blvd N SUMMARY OF REQUEST: On February 12, 2015, the applicant submitted an application for a Critical Areas Exemption for the removal of hazard trees from a protected slope in accordance with RMC 4-3-0SOC.5.iii. RMC 4-3-0SOC.4.d Criteria for Critical Area Exemption Approval. i. The activity is not prohibited by this or any other chapter of the RMC or State or Federal law or regulation; Staff Comment: The definition of Dangerous Trees is outlined under RMC 4-11-200 Tree, Dangerous: Any tree that has been certified, in a written report, as dead, terminally diseased, damaged, or otherwise dangerous to persons or property by a licensed landscape architect, or certified arborist. On February 19, 2015, staff received an email from the City's Arborist stating that the trees in question did not pose a threat to persons or property and therefore did not meet the definition of a dangerous tree. ii. The activity will be conducted using best management practices as specified by industry standards or applicable Federal agencies or scientific principles; City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development Hazard Tree and Vegetation Management Critical Areas Exemption Report & Decision LUAlS-000079, CAE Report of February 26, 2015 Page2of3 DECISION Staff Camment: As previously stated abave the trees in questian do not pose o threat to persons or property and therefore do not meet the definition of a dangerous tree. iii. Impacts are minimized and, where applicable, disturbed areas are immediately restored, unless the exemption is a wetland below the size thresholds pursuant to subsection CSf(i} of this Section; Staff Comment: As previously stated above the trees in question do not pose a threat to persons or property and therefore do not meet the definition of a dangerous tree. iv. Where water body or buffer disturbance has occurred in accordance with an exemption during construction or other activities, revegetation with native vegetation shall be required. Staff Comment: As previously stated above the trees in question do not pose a threat to persons or property and therefore do not meet the definition of a dangerous tree. v. If a hazardous material, activity, and/or facility that is exempt pursuant to this Section has a significant or substantial potential to degrade groundwater quality, then the Department Administrator may require compliance with the aquifer protection requirements of this Section otherwise relevant to that hazardous material, activity, and/or facility. Such determinations will be based upon site and/or chemical-specific data. Staff Comment: As previously stated above the trees in question do not pose a threat to persons or property and therefore do not meet the definition of a dangerous tree. The proposal does not comply with the 5 criteria listed in RMC 4-3-0SOC.4.d for approval of critical areas exemptions. Therefore, the Hazard Tree & Vegetation Management critical areas exemption(s} for the removal of trees on a protected slope, Project Number LUAlS-000079, CAE is(are} denied. 2-26-2015 Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Date CITY OF RENTO~ DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM Date: October 6, 2016 To: City Clerk's Office From: Sabrina Mirante Subject: Land Use File Closeout Please complete the following information to facilitate project closeout and indexing by the City Clerk's Office Project Name: Pinnacle Hazard Tree Removal LUA (file) Number: LUA15-000079, CAE Cross-References: AKA's: Project Manager: Jill Ding Acceptance Date: February 12, 2015 Applicant: Thomas Kachman Owner: BRE-FMCA, LLC Contact: Thomas Kachman, Essex Properties PID Number: 3344500390, 052305903 ERC Determination: Date: Anneal Period Ends: Administrative Decision: Denied Date: February 26, 2015 Anneal Period Ends: March 12, 2015 Public Hearing Date: Date Appealed to HEX: By Whom: HEX Decision: Date: Anneal Period Ends: Date Appealed to Council: By Whom: Council Decision: Date: Mylar Recording Number: Project Description: On February 12, 2015, the applicant submitted an application for a Critical Areas Exemption for the removal of hazard trees from a protected slope in accordance with RMC 4- 3-050C.5.iii. The definition of Dangerous Trees is outlined under RMC 4-11-200 Tree, Dangerous: Any tree that has been certified, in a written report, as dead, terminally diseased, damaged, or otherwise dangerous to persons or property by a licensed landscape architect, or certified arborist. On February 19, 2015, staff received an email from the City's Arborist stating that the trees in question did not pose a threat to persons or property and therefore did not meet the definition of a danoerous tree or the annlicable Critical Areas Exemntion criteria. Location: 1400 Lake Washington Blvd N I Comm,nls, ERC Determination Types: DNS -Determination of Non-Significance; DNS-M -Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated; OS -Determination of Significance. I -· DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY OWNER(S) -- NAME: BRE-FMCA LLC / Essex ADDRESS: 1400 Lake Washington Blvd N CITY: ZIP: Renton, 98056 WA 425-457-1592 TELEPHONE NUMBER: APPLICANT (if other than owner} Thomas Kachman NAME: Essex property Trust COMPANY (W applicable): 11911 NE 1~street#B112 ADDRESS: Bellevue 98005 CITY: ZIP: 425-457-1592 TELEPHONE NUMBER: CONTACT PERSON I NAME: Thomas Kachman COMPANY Essex Property trust: 11911NE 1"' Street#B212 ADDRESS: CITY: 98005 Bellevue ZIP: WA TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS: 425-457-1572 t~.ad~r-1r1:1/:~~\~':.{~), _c,:,_-11 PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: Hazard Tree and Vegetation Management PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE: 1400 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton. WA 98056 KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): 334450-0390 EXISTING LAND USE(S): Multiple Residence PROPOSED LAND USE(S): Multiple Residence EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable) N/A EXISTING ZONING: PROPOSED ZONING(~ applicable): N/A SITE AREA (in square feet) SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED: N/A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: N/A PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET ACRE (if applicable) N/A NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (W applicable) N/A NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (W applicable): N/A -1 C:\ProgramData\activePDF\OC_ENl\Tmp\f9e010\WIN-91PKE6392EJ3d436035-S2SC:-4b60--bd06-4a99980b4e2cPinnicle Master Application.doc 05/14 i ' ' PROJECT INFORMATION (continued) .---'-~----...... -------------. NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): PROJECT VALUE: NIA NIA . SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): NIA IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): NIA SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL D AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA ONE 0 AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA 1WO BUILDINGS (tt applicable): N/A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (tt applicable): N/A NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (rt applicable): NIA NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (tt applicable): NIA U FLOOD HAZARD AREA Ki GEOLOGIC HAZARD 0 HABITAT CONSERVATION 0 SHORELINE STREAMS & LAKES 0 WEn.ANDS LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY ___ sq.ft. ___ sq.ft. ___ sq.ft. ___ sq.ft. ___ sq.ft. {Attach leaal descrlDtion on separate sheet with the following information included) SITUATE IN THE SW QUARTER OF SECTION _5_, TOWNSHIP .2l._, RANGE _5_, IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) Thomas Kachman declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that I am (please check one) __ the current owner of the property involved in this application or _xx_ the authorized representative to act for a corporation {please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the IJest of my knowledge and belief. Signature of ONnerlRepresentative STATE OF WASHINGTON ) COUNTY OF KING ) 55 ) 1/27/2015 Date I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Thoma:. /(ad1, man signed this instrument and acknowledge it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purpose mentioned in the instrument. j__/,J.7/ .2.015 Dated tate of Washington Notary (Print): 1 Rf S S.re T A )G ()"'/ E t1 J My appointment expires: 0 \ { 09/ ;). 0 f 1 -2- C;\Programoata\actlvePDF\OC_EN1\Tmp\f9e010\WIN-91PKE6392EJ3d436035-52Bc.4bf-O-bd06--4a99980b4e2cPlnnlcle Master App~cation.dOt 05/14 CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTl~:·EiVEC) Applicant Name Thomas Kachman Parcel Number 334450-0390 Brief Description of Project (FOR SEPA EXEMPT ACTIVITIES) FEP /l r: ,,- Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 l Project Name Pinnacle Hazard Tree and Vegetation Management Phone Number 425-457-1572 I Project Address 1400 Lake Washington Blvd N, Renton, WA 98056 The Pinnacles are a large apartment complex build above and below a steep, vegetative slope. Because of its designation, vegetation in this area has not been managed. This has lead to numerous trees being classified as hazard trees by a licensed arborist. The Pinnacles would like to remove the hazard trees and plant additional native vegetation in the critical area to prevent future slides. Type of Critical Area D Work Occurs in ~ Work Occurs in Steep slopes Critical Area Buffer PURPOSE: Exempt activities provided with a letter of exemption from the Development Services Administrator may intrude into a critical area or required buffer (Subject to any conditions or requirements provided by the Administrator). APPLICABILITY OF EXEMPTIONS: The following is a general list of activities that may be exempt from the critical areas regulations. More specific descriptions of the activities are contained in the Critical Areas Regulations. Some of the listed activities may not be exempt in certain critical areas. The Planning Division will evaluate you request according to the City of Renton Critical Areas Regulations in RMC 4-3- 0SOC, J, L, and N. I AM REQUESTING A CRITICAL AREAS EXEMPTION FOR ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES: D Conservation, Enhancement, and Related Activities: • Conservation or preservation of soil, water, vegetation, fish, and other wildlife • Enhancement activities as defined in chapter 4-11 RMC D; • Any critical area, buffer restoration, or other mitigation activities that have been approved by the City D Research and Site Investigation: • Nondestructive education and research • Site investigative work necessary for land use application submittals such as surveys, soil logs, etc. D Agricultural, Harvesting, and Vegetation Management: • Harvesting wild foods -7- H: \CED\Data \Forms-T emplates\Self-Help Handouts\Planning\Critical Areas Exemption.doc 04/12 • Existing/Ongoing agricultural activities 1 • Removal of dead, terminally diseased, damaged, or dangerous ground cover or hazardous trees which have been certified as such by a forester, registered landscape architect, or certified arborist 0 Surface Water Alteration: • New surface water discharges provided the discharge meets the requirements of the Storm and Surface Water Drainage Regulations 1 2 3 • New or modified regional storm water facilities 1 2 3 • Flood hazard reduction 1 3 4 6 0 Roads, Parks, Public and Private Utilities: • Relocation of Existing Utilities out of Critical Area and Buffer • Maintenance, operation, and repair of existing parks, trails, roads, facilities, and utilities 1 2 • Installation, construction, replacement, or operation of utilities, traffic control, and walkways within existing improved right-if-way or easement 1 2 • Modification of existing utilities and streets by 10% or less 1 2 5 • Management and essential tree removal for public or private utilities, roads and public parks 1 0 Wetland Disturbance, Modification, and Removal: • Any activity in small Category 3 wetlands 1 2 3 4 5 • Temporary disturbances of a wetland due to construction activities that do not include permanent filling 1 2 3 5 ~ Maintenance and Construction for Existing Uses and Facilities: • Remodeling, replacing, or removing existing structures 1 2 • Normal and routine maintenance and repair of any existing public or private uses and facilities where no alteration of the critical area and required buffer or additional fill materials will be placed 1 2 • Construction activity connected with an existing single family residence or garage, provided that no portion of the new work occurs closer to the critical area or required buffers than the existing structure 1 2 • Existing activities which have not been changed, expanded or altered provided they comply with the applicable requirements of chapter 4-10 RMC 1 IYf" Emergency Activities: • Removal of trees or ground cover by a City department, agency, public, or private utility in an emergency situation • Public interest emergency use, storage, and handling of hazardous materials by governmental organizations in an Aquifer Protection Area ADDITIONAL PERMITS: Additional permits from other agencies may be required. It is the applicant's responsibility to obtain these other approvals. Information regarding these other requirements may be found at http://apps.ecy.wa.gov/opas/ -8-04/12 H:\CEO\Data\Forms·Templates\Self-Help Handouts\Plannlng\Crltical Areas Exemption.doc I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington, that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. Applicant Signature: 7~~4-j__ For City Use Only D Exemption Granted C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Planning Director Planning Division Conditions of Approval: iExemption does not apply in Aquifer Protection Areas 2Exemption does not apply in Flood Hazard Areas 3 Exemption does not apply in Geologic Hazard Areas 4 Exemption does not apply in Habitat Conservation Areas 5 Exemption does not apply in Streams and Lakes: Class 2 to 4 6 Exernpbon does not apply in Wetlands -9- H:\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Setf-Help Handouts\Planning\Critical Areas Exemption.doc Date: 1/27/2015 D Exemption Denied Date 04/12 Bill Rehe Pinnacle on Lake Washington site arboristsr~\t\/. uc ' 1~Ec··,E1vr·,·· CL) FEB O 5 zo1:; CITY OF RENTON PlANNiNG D1v1s1o,,1 P.O. Box 909 Mercer Island, WA 98040 (206) 779-2579 I have personally inspected several trees at "Pinnacle on Lake Washington" complex as you requested. Keeping in mind your desire to create a long term plan for the trees and land around and on the property I used a International Society of Arboriculture level 1 Limited visual assessment. Jeff from Tolt Tree care had pointed out 6 trees in particular. I added 4 trees after a closer look at the original trees. The trees I will discuss are now tagged and number 1-10 find the attached maps with their locations. Of the trees there are 2 different situations, trees on the severally undermined lip of the bluff which I would call coastal if it was closer to lake Washington which is across Lake Washington Blvd. from the complex. The western edge of the property·still has the look of a coastal wasting Bluff. The species involved are Red Alder, Cottonwood, Big Leaf Maple and 2 Douglas firs (#'s 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9 and 10). The second situation, trees hazardous to the building and people (#5, 6 Big Leaf Maples and 7 a Douglas fir) One of the trees that I added to my inspection was particularly interesting (#10). This tree appears to be a remnant of the last large scale slough off of material on this vertical face. The trunk of the tree is growing downhill and would be lying on the ground if there was any under it and is in the 18-22" DBH range. In my opinion this tree was a small sapling at the time of the last slough off stayed rooted in the new precipice then flourished after a period of stress and die back. In observing the tree from the west one can see the original stem now dead and in the 3-4" diameter range about 10' long then the old remaining live trunk. This trunk is in the same size range as the trees in the debris field (Noting the size of the trees in the debris field below a wasting bluff is a method of determining major wasting events, my opinion is 25-30 years ago). There are 2 leaders that look like trees growing out of the original trunk with slightly smaller DBH's then the trees in the debris field 22-25" DBH. Now to the trees on what I will call the lip of the slope. 2 trees numbered 1, 2 are stump sprouted Big Leaf Maples having several trunks and are severally undermined with more than half of their root systems either missing or under cut. Trees with this problem also include number #'s 3, 4 andlO above Red Alders, #8 a Douglas fir, #9 a Cottonwood. Numbers 3, 4 8, 9 are normally shaped trees. Number 4 has a 45% lean and bow sweep All of these trees in my opinion need cut back to let them retain their live root systems and secure the soils buy reducing the weight hanging off the lip of the bluff. This mitigation can add years if not decades to the position of the bluff edge and slows its creep towards the buildings on the property. Counting·on trees to re-sprout is an excepted method of this type of control and the 3 main species involved are some of the best at re-sprouting. Red Alder, Big Leaf maple and Cottonwood. So the trees as hazards; There is a high risk of pulling the top face of the bluff down and a moderate risk to fall far enough to hit the carport of the apartments below, That is if just the top lip and the trees fall. This in no way addresses a larger landslide. Trees numbered 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, and 10 Now to the trees that don't affect the bluff but are hazardous to the buildings proper. There are 2 BLMs with extensive past branch and scaffold branch failures. One has extensive stump decay #5 the other a 25' -30' spiral crack in the trunk #6 showing the intensity of the winds effect on this tree. Both of these trees are on the windward side of the building and within 35' of it. One tree is in the 125' tall {6) range the other in the 80' range (5). I would give these trees a hazard rating of 12 on the older ISA hazard form out of a possible 12. Tree 6 could last until spring but after the leaves reemerge any winds may cause the tree to fail. Tree number 5 with the severe stump rot in my opinion should be mitigated as soon as possible! Fortunately both trees can be counted on to re-sprout keeping their root systems alive. Tree number 7 a Douglas fir on the far north of the property has lost its top and is now deformed with one large apically dominating branch now growing towards the building and within 15'. Structural pruning or possible removal and replacement of this tree would be the methods of mitigating this situation. In closing structural pruning, cutting for re-sprout and replacement trees or shrubs are the methods of mitigation to help you in your plan to manage the wasting bluff, stand stability and reduce hazardous conditions near the buildings. Respectfully Submitted Neal Baker ArboristsNW.com ISA Cert PN1075A ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified PNW ISA CTRA #867 Member AREA & SOCA 206 779 2579 0 ~ I 0 ~ 0 0